{"title":"Conclusion","authors":"A. Kohli","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190069629.003.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The conclusion summarizes the main findings of the study concerning the motives that drove British and American imperialism, their respective mechanisms of rule, and the impact of their global expansion, especially on the global periphery. The main motive that drove both the hegemonic powers of the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries to expand overseas was to enhance their respective national prosperity. While Britain pursued both formal and informal empire, the United States settled mainly for the latter. Britain and the United States pursued formal empire when they could but accepted informal control when they met resistance. The impact of colonialism was more pernicious than that of informal empire. Colonies were exploited by metropolitan countries for their own advantage and seldom experienced economic growth. Countries under informal sway did experience more growth but failed to create diversified economies. Whether emerging China is also developing an informal empire is explored at the end.","PeriodicalId":230628,"journal":{"name":"Imperialism and the Developing World","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Imperialism and the Developing World","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190069629.003.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The conclusion summarizes the main findings of the study concerning the motives that drove British and American imperialism, their respective mechanisms of rule, and the impact of their global expansion, especially on the global periphery. The main motive that drove both the hegemonic powers of the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries to expand overseas was to enhance their respective national prosperity. While Britain pursued both formal and informal empire, the United States settled mainly for the latter. Britain and the United States pursued formal empire when they could but accepted informal control when they met resistance. The impact of colonialism was more pernicious than that of informal empire. Colonies were exploited by metropolitan countries for their own advantage and seldom experienced economic growth. Countries under informal sway did experience more growth but failed to create diversified economies. Whether emerging China is also developing an informal empire is explored at the end.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
结论
结论部分总结了本研究的主要发现,包括英美帝国主义的动机、各自的统治机制以及它们的全球扩张(尤其是对全球外围国家的扩张)的影响。19世纪和20世纪的霸权国家向海外扩张的主要动机都是为了促进各自国家的繁荣。当英国同时追求正式和非正式的帝国时,美国主要满足于后者。英国和美国在可能的时候追求正式的帝国,但在遇到阻力时接受非正式的控制。殖民主义的影响比非正式帝国的影响更有害。殖民地为自己的利益被宗主国剥削,很少经历经济增长。受非正式影响的国家确实经历了更多的增长,但未能创造多样化的经济。文章最后探讨了新兴的中国是否也在发展一个非正式的帝国。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Conclusion Varieties of Colonialism The East India Company
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1